Author
Topic: Canon 6D or 5D Mark III (Read 22495 times)

I went through this debate myself, and decided to go with a 6D. I have been very happy with the camera so far.

P.S. I did some model "hair flinging" work with my wireless flash triggers (Yongnuo YN-622C E-TTL) and had no problem with syncing at 1/200th and even 1/250th.

Limiting the maximum shutter speed to 1/4000th was a chintzy move...even my 60D has 1/8000th. Still, as a previous poster said, this is rarely actually an issue in the field. I would only use 1/8000th when bracketing.

Finally, after shooting a few events professionally with both the 6D and 5DII in harness, I would gladly trade my 5DII for a second 6D.

The 6D is a microwaved 5D2, which was already a re-cooked 5D, which had its original serving as a 20D. (In terms of actual camera performance, not IQ )

If you want a better performing camera, 5D3 is the best route. It won't limit you later on like the 6D could with its AF performance.

One question: are you making this judgment after having used both cameras, or just because you think this is true?

I can tell you from having used a MKII professionally extensively that in many ways the 6D is a big step upwards from the MKII. I have not owned or used a MKIII, although I have extensively researched it. The MKIII is without the superior camera overall, but even that is not straightforward. There is some give and take with both bodies, and, for me, I concluded that the "give" with the 6D right now was worth the "take".

The truth of the matter is that the 6D actually has more modern technology than any other Canon camera at the moment, even if the form factor and AF are not premium.

The 6D is a microwaved 5D2, which was already a re-cooked 5D, which had its original serving as a 20D. (In terms of actual camera performance, not IQ )

If you want a better performing camera, 5D3 is the best route. It won't limit you later on like the 6D could with its AF performance.

One question: are you making this judgment after having used both cameras, or just because you think this is true?

I can tell you from having used a MKII professionally extensively that in many ways the 6D is a big step upwards from the MKII. I have not owned or used a MKIII, although I have extensively researched it. The MKIII is without the superior camera overall, but even that is not straightforward. There is some give and take with both bodies, and, for me, I concluded that the "give" with the 6D right now was worth the "take".

The truth of the matter is that the 6D actually has more modern technology than any other Canon camera at the moment, even if the form factor and AF are not premium.

Yes, I used the 6D for a day rental and found it's AF nothing particular special from my previous 5Dc or the MK2. I didn't have time to really test it's reported -3EV center point AF, but I could imagine its spectacular in low light as the 5Dc and MK2's we're pretty good.

As for the other features, They're nice fluff but I know it's a camera that could be outgrown if any serious AF situations arrive. IE: off-centered subject approaching camera while shooting Sub-F/2.8.

Perhaps, the 7D spoiled me with these expectations but the MK3 is a camera I will not outgrow for awhile.

The operative pharase here is......"But I am confused, do I really spend 3.5K (with the kit lens) for a hobby." If you have to ask the question, then the answer is no. The 6D is not 'settling down'....it's a fine camera and should please any hobbyist. It may please a professional only as a backup body but you're not a professional. Get it. Enjoy it. Buy some nice glass.

Some of my photos are in the below link, please check and let me know if I should consider going for FF and if FF, should I go for the 5D MIII?

For what you seem to shoot af performance doesn't seem to be critical, you can afford to refocus, take a 2nd shot and then pick the best one - in this case I'd advise the 6d, even as underspeced (or overpriced) as it is in comparison to the competition.

I recently compared 5d3/6d side by side for 2 hours, the 5d3 is clearly the more professional gear not only because of faster fps, higher shutter rating and a bit faster x-sync, but because the handling is faster (like double button layout, mfn button, firmware customization). But if you don't depend on this speed gain or the upcoming f8 af with Canon lenses+tc, the investment in glass will give you better results.

If you want a better performing camera, 5D3 is the best route. It won't limit you later on like the 6D could with its AF performance.

True, but what exactly is "later on"? Like 2014 when the 5d4 arrives with higher mp/dr and the 5d3 can be bought for $2000? Imho an advanced investment in lenses can be a good idea, but I'll get the camera body that fits my requirements as they are right now.

You mentioned you were interested in low-light photography. In that case, the 5D2 will not fit your needs, but the 6D would beautifully (as of course would the 5D3). I love my 6D for it's low light capabilities and while the 5DIII does more, you can put the money you save on buying a 6D rather than the 5D3 on or toward another lens. I guess it all comes down to whether you'd really get the use out of the extra features of the 5D3 more than you'd get from another lens.

Can you explain what you mean by low-light capabilities? And why would the 5DII not fit his needs for that? I never had any issues with my 5DII in low light settings. Quite the opposite actually. I'm not sure how the 6D is even better with that. But even if that is the case I doubt that that has more practical implications than the 6D's lower x-sync speed, missing 1/8000 and the small plasticky form factor.The 5DII is not only a bargain at this point - at least for my needs I'd still consider it the better camera. The MarkIII of course solves all those issues pretty much but still comes in with a much higher price tag and I'd only shell that out if I'd really need the additional features and upgrades over the MarkII. I'm in no rush with that personally.

The 6D gives you approximately 1 stop better high ISO performance than the 5D2. While that is the way it is, it doesn't make the 5d2 any less of a camera for the OP's needs. Just because a new model is out does not mean that the one of the best and most popular cameras of its age, is rendered useless.

The truth of the matter is that the 6D actually has more modern technology than any other Canon camera at the moment, even if the form factor and AF are not premium.

-1

The technology that you cite mostly consists of the GPS and the WiFi ... Hardly any technological breakthrough. The 6D is also unnecessarily crippled because Canon wanted to put some distance between it and the 5D3.

IMHO, the AF of the 5D3 is a massive factor, leave aside the other modern technology that you mention - if you could get a good sharp shot in a single attempt with the 5D3, why would you want to focus, recompose, shoot and pray with a 6D?

If you want a better performing camera, 5D3 is the best route. It won't limit you later on like the 6D could with its AF performance.

True, but what exactly is "later on"? Like 2014 when the 5d4 arrives with higher mp/dr and the 5d3 can be bought for $2000? Imho an advanced investment in lenses can be a good idea, but I'll get the camera body that fits my requirements as they are right now.

If I understand this correctly, RLPhoto could have been referring to a buyer's remorse over a $1K once they come to grips with the 6D. At one point you are bound to feel the pangs of having an outdated AF system.

BTW Marsu42 ... Not everyone has your level of self-control, if I can call it that.

The truth of the matter is that the 6D actually has more modern technology than any other Canon camera at the moment, even if the form factor and AF are not premium.

-1

The technology that you cite mostly consists of the GPS and the WiFi ... Hardly any technological breakthrough. The 6D is also unnecessarily crippled because Canon wanted to put some distance between it and the 5D3.

IMHO, the AF of the 5D3 is a massive factor, leave aside the other modern technology that you mention - if you could get a good sharp shot in a single attempt with the 5D3, why would you want to focus, recompose, shoot and pray with a 6D?

The truth of the matter is that the 6D actually has more modern technology than any other Canon camera at the moment, even if the form factor and AF are not premium.

-1

The technology that you cite mostly consists of the GPS and the WiFi ... Hardly any technological breakthrough. The 6D is also unnecessarily crippled because Canon wanted to put some distance between it and the 5D3.

IMHO, the AF of the 5D3 is a massive factor, leave aside the other modern technology that you mention - if you could get a good sharp shot in a single attempt with the 5D3, why would you want to focus, recompose, shoot and pray with a 6D?

Wow, I hope that isn't what you think I am doing!

Surely not because you are doing this professionally. But can you say that the AF of the 5d3 doesn't and won't make a difference?

If I understand this correctly, RLPhoto could have been referring to a buyer's remorse over a $1K once they come to grips with the 6D. At one point you are bound to feel the pangs of having an outdated AF system.

Well, all I can say it took me years to get to the limits of the 60d af system (and to be sure it's the camera's fault and not mine) - of course if using servo af a lot it's another story, but for general stills shooting the 6d af system might be outdated, but still perfectly usable. And we have to remember that the 5d3/1dx af has to be accompanied by the latest Canon lenses to really shine esp. concerning precision.

If I understand this correctly, RLPhoto could have been referring to a buyer's remorse over a $1K once they come to grips with the 6D. At one point you are bound to feel the pangs of having an outdated AF system.

Well, all I can say it took me years to get to the limits of the 60d af system (and to be sure it's the camera's fault and not mine) - of course if using servo af a lot it's another story, but for general stills shooting the 6d af system might be outdated, but still perfectly usable. And we have to remember that the 5d3/1dx af has to be accompanied by the latest Canon lenses to really shine esp. concerning precision.

The 60D's AF is all cross-type, not too shabby. As for the 6D, Its little improvement over 5D2 /5Dc / 20D :|

Its disappointing when a Rebel series camera has better AF than the same generation FF mid-range camera.

Absolutely, and I'm quite happy with the 60d except for high iso and shadow noise - but I've learned that if taking shots of something important, it's a good idea to take 2-3 shots just to be on the safe side because (rough guess) every 1:20 shots the af is off looking @100% crop, even more when doing handheld macro.

So I wouldn't say I "trust" the 60d's af system, but I heard 5d3 users really trust theirs to be reliable.